If National wins ...

[Rep]

Laffer Curve.... anyone, anyone...Voodoo Economics...

https://youtu.be/uhiCFdWeQfA

[fungus pudding]

The Laffer curve is fairly intuitive, the problem is what is the ideal rate for maximum tax returns?

Did Laffer support a flat tax? I would be surprised if he did. I imagine the Laffer curve could look quite different depending on the earnings of the population you are considering. Tax brackets allow you to find the correct point on the Laffer curve for each earning bracket, thereby maximising your returns. Whereas a single income tax rate (flat tax) would be much less efficient at tax collecting.

I had a bit of a read and assuming a flat tax rate is in place it seems the ideal tax rate is around 70% if you subscribe to Laffers theory. Ouch! We are well off the ideal rate if we are aiming to maximise the tax collected by the government.

Perhaps i should write Bill a letter suggesting a shake-up to income tax, to be conservative i could suggest a 60% flat tax

The most efficient tax rate on most models is around 22%. Much higher and you're around the tip of the curve and heading down the wrong side.

[Adam H]

I haven't seen a single source that suggested anything below 45% was ideal, and i have browsed few. Where did you get this moat model from?

22% seems pretty unrealistic. Most countries are quite a bit higher than that. Surely if the ideal rate was that low governments would have cottoned on by now and lowered tax rates, not only would they gather more tax, people would like them better too.

All the sources i read through seemed to suggest most countries were safely on the low tax side of Laffers curve

[fungus pudding]

I haven't seen a single source that suggested anything below 45% was ideal, and i have browsed few. Where did you get this moat model from?

22% seems pretty unrealistic. Most countries are quite a bit higher than that. Surely if the ideal rate was that low governments would have cottoned on by now and lowered tax rates, not only would they gather more tax, people would like them better too.

All the sources i read through seemed to suggest most countries were safely on the low tax side of Laffers curve

Sorry - most models. Not moat. Some countries that have introduced low flat taxes have benefitted enormously. There have been many experiments showing where the black economy kicks in (around 22%). It's rife in NZ and without much difficulty you will find a serviceman or tradesman in most fields who will discount for payment in foldies. (cash without receipt) The IRD are well aware of it. The biggest problem in introducing low flat taxes is the envy that kicks in.
This book, I first read maybe 25 years ago remains one of the most interesting book on economics I have ever read. Author Jude Wanniski

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/...he_World_Works

[777]

Lovely people some of those on the left.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/972...peech-graffiti

[elZorro]

EZ and JT - that Crosby guy is great eh

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/pol...l-the-election

That makes a lot of sense. Of course! The old dead cat trick.. Labour need to employ some better media advisors. They should also have read the Dirty Politics book again, to remind themselves.

[janner]

When will your edition of

" What Happened " appear ???

[winner69]

Greens are munted big time - completely lost their way and directionless.

In a LAB / NZF / GRN coalition they will have little if any say. Best for them long term is probably stay outside such a coalition and just agree to vote yes on confidence things. That way they won't get tainted when the inevitable wipe out occurs in 2020.

If I was in charge of the Greens I'd sell my soul. Sack Shaw now and admit to the members we've stuffed up big time and that we'll go back to green roots etc etc ......and then prostitute ourselves to National to form a government ......and not even demand too much.

Best long term plan methinks. This way come 2020 NZF will probably be a goner or at worst no stronger and so possibly be the 3rd biggest party anyway. It gives the Greens three years to consolidate and get their house in order and could be more 'demanding' in 2020.

Sometimes you need to sell your soul to survive - and the Nats would go along with this as getting Winston onside is unlikely (seeing they've stuffed it up already) or unbearable.

Win win for NAT and Greens - easy easy

(Who really runs the Green Party?)

[Adam H]

If I was in charge of the Greens I'd sell my soul. Sack Shaw now and admit to the members we've stuffed up big time and that we'll go back to green roots etc etc ......and then prostitute ourselves to National to form a government ......and not even demand too much.
(Who really runs the Green Party?)

Considering most of their support base is left leaning i think it would be suicide to join national and then just tag along without pushing hard for environmental policy. I do agree that they should focus on the environment more though, and get themselves in a position where they could be the new kingmaker. At the moment they only get in if Labour has enough votes to govern with the help of the Greens but not enough to govern alone... a pretty small window and definitely not ideal!

[Adam H]

Lovely people some of those on the left.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/972...peech-graffiti

Pretty nasty thing to do, dont care about the road tagging but to tag someones front gate, especially with loaded words is really threatening. Taggers are generally young, and the young generally favour the left. Also young Nats 'won' so don't have a reason to tag. If Labour win in 2020 i am sure you will be unbiased and post articles showing Nats being sore losers too